Travelling Man, on 25 November 2012 - 11:56 PM, said:
[/font]
It's amazing what someone with a little knowledge and no understanding claims to understand.
Pike was head of the Scottish Rite for a long time - and the Scottish Rite is NOT Freemasonry - it is an appendent body. If you were a Freemason - or studied on the subject, you'd understand the difference. It's an associated club, separate from Freemasonry.
He wrote some 130 books, and he USED to be considered the go-to man for information on... wait for it... THE SCOTTISH RITE, not the Blue Lodge. There is a profound difference between the two. Nowadays, the only people that hold him up as the most important man in Masonic history are Anti-masons.
The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry (the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction in the United States often omits the
and), commonly known as simply the
Scottish Rite, is one of several Rites of the worldwide fraternity known as Freemasonry.
Whereas it is officially recognized in the United States as an extension of Freemasonry, The Scottish Rite is one of the appendant bodies of Freemasonry that a "Master Mason" may join for further exposure to the principles of Freemasonry.
So obviously Pike had been a Master Mason. Are you certain you're in the right club? LOL
Quote
Yes, now it is, but before astronomy was an established science, most sages and learned people called it astrology - the study of the stars. In the mid 1800's, the terms were used interchangeably... and even until the 1950's it was very common to use "astrology" to label the actual science of astronomy.
Right, and this is 2012.
Quote
Do you understand now what trouble can be caused by spouting things off without fully understanding them? If you had read the Picatrix or had just studied ABOUT the Picatrix, you'd understand that it is the cornerstone in the scientific community, and laid out the process by which a learned man could evaluate his surroundings by using what we now know as the Scientific Method - hypotheses, testing, recording, conclusions - the whole works was laid out in that great tome.
The reason I said "huh" was your statement of which I didn't understand:
Quote
As for al-Hakim and the Picatrix, while it is an interesting work and it set up the Scientific Method that we now use, to say that it is involved in Freemasonry or that we use it is akin to saying that we base our memberships upon Merriam Webster's Dictionary.
Quote
Would you care to try to sound educated again, or are you going to admit that you are discussing something that you have not studied or contemplated, and that you would rather just rattle things off that others have said without actually checking their veracity? There is no shame in saying, "I just don't know."
I am not Mason, and I am not an expert on Freemasonry, I am on the other hand well read on the Picatrix.
Albert Pike was considered THE authority on Freemasonry, for you to ignore this throws red flags up as your own validation as a Mason.
Here is an article on exactly your view of Pike and why you are completely wrong in your assertion of his worth in Freemasonry.
http://freemasonrywa...pikeandkkk.html